On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:19 PM, A Darren Dunham <ddun...@taos.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:04:24PM -0600, Tim Cook wrote: > > No. The whole point of a snapshot is to keep a consistent on-disk state > > from a certain point in time. I'm not entirely sure how you managed to > > corrupt blocks that are part of an existing snapshot though, as they'd be > > read-only. > > Physical corruption of the media > Something outside of ZFS diddling bits on storage > > > The only way that should even be able to happen is if you took a > > snapshot after the blocks were already corrupted. Any new writes would > be > > allocated from new blocks. > > It can be corrupted while it sits on disk. Since it's read-only, you > can't force it to allocate anything and clean itself up. > > You're telling me a scrub won't actively clean up corruption in snapshots? That sounds absolutely absurd to me. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
